Front focal or not??? New Vortex...

I'm fixin to buy a new Vortex PST and wanted to know if I need a front focal or not. I'm going to use this for hunting white tails and shooting steel. What y'all think is it worth it or is the rear focal better for hunting???

If you're going to use the reticle for ranging or hold over's the FFP would be the better choice as you could do those things throughout the power range. If you're going to use it as a regular scope or dial the come ups the SFP would work fine. You can still range and hold over with a second focal plane scope. The marks are correct at full power and on other powers if you do the math. Read the product manual on thier website lots of info.

If you can look through both it will help with the decision.

__________________

Jim

There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man. Sir Winston Churchill.

Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom. Einstein

SFP scopes hold no value to me anymore. The reticles in a FFP typically are 2" @ 1000
yards on full power so the old argument of them covering the target doesn't wash with
me. FFP is a sturdier way to build a scope, the reason for the Europeans building them
that way for 60 or 70 years. And for ranging they are a must. To have to change power
or check it to range is a missed shot waiting to happen. Your rangefinder has already
failed for cold or snow, so in the heat of the battle you are supposed to run through a
checklist? Not for me.

SFP scopes hold no value to me anymore. The reticles in a FFP typically are 2" @ 1000
yards on full power so the old argument of them covering the target doesn't wash with
me. FFP is a sturdier way to build a scope, the reason for the Europeans building them
that way for 60 or 70 years. And for ranging they are a must. To have to change power
or check it to range is a missed shot waiting to happen. Your rangefinder has already
failed for cold or snow, so in the heat of the battle you are supposed to run through a
checklist? Not for me.

+1
I have got to agree with Loner. Now that I have gone FFP I can hardly remember what took me so long to make the change! A few years ago the FFP reticles were pretty thick and this could be a turnoff to some but anymore manufacturers have this all figured out.

The one bit of misinformation you often hear about FFP is that the reticle gets too thick at the higher powers but this isn't true (unless the shooter thinks it is too thick at the lower magnification settings). The relationship between the reticle and the target stays the same at all powers so the reticle is the same thickness in relation to the target.

I think the only situation I would think about SFP would maybe be a dedicated LR varmint gun for prairie dogs and rock chucks. Even then some of the new FFP reticles would be more than adequate.

I only use SFP scopes. The ranging with the reticle simply leaves to much error in the equation for my needs. Plus I prefer the target getting larger and the cross hairs staying smaller for a more precise point of aim as I increase the power.

That said I tend to shoot longer distances than the normal LR shooter / hunter. So if you are only going to shoot to 700 yards or so you may have a different opinion.

I do not do holdover nor do I hold for wind. I choose to dial both elevation and windage and for this the SFP is far superior in my opinion.